Provided an excellent introduction which identified the company being profiled and included a brief overview of the company (may reuse narrative from Part 1 of this assignment). Appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources. |
Provided an outstanding introduction which identified the company being profiled and included a brief overview of the company (may reuse narrative from Part 1 of this assignment). Appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources. |
Provided an introduction which identified the company being profiled and included a brief overview of the company (may reuse narrative from Part 1 of this assignment). Appropriately used information from authoritative sources. |
Provided an introduction to the company but the section lacked some required details. Information from authoritative sources was cited and used in the overview. |
Attempted to provide an introduction to the company but this section lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources. |
The introduction section was missing or did not clearly identify the company. |
|
Provided an excellent summary of the sources, potential impacts, and planned mitigation approach/strategy for cyberspace and/or cybersecurity related risks as identified in the Risk Section of the company’s annual report. |
Provided an outstanding summary of the sources, potential impacts, and planned mitigation approach/strategy for cyberspace and/or cybersecurity related risks as identified in the Risk Section of the company’s annual report. Appropriately used and cited information from 3 or more authoritative sources. |
Provided a summary of the sources, potential impacts, and planned mitigation approach/strategy for cyberspace and/or cybersecurity related risks as identified in the Risk Section of the company’s annual report. Appropriately used and cited information from 2 or more authoritative sources. |
Provided a summary of the sources, potential impacts, and planned mitigation approach/strategy for cyberspace and/or cybersecurity related risks as identified in the Risk Section of the company’s annual report. Appropriately used and cited information from authoritative sources. |
Provided a discussion of the cybersecurity risks that the company faces. The discussion lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources. |
Risk discussion was missing or off topic. |
|
Provided a complete, concise, and thorough Risk Register (columns 1 and 2 of table) for 10 or more cyberspace or cybersecurity related risks as identified in the company’s annual report. (Risk ID was numeric sequence # or short title suitable for cross-referencing.) |
Provided a complete, concise, and thorough Risk Register (columns 1 and 2 of table) for 8 or more cyberspace or cybersecurity related risks as identified in the company’s annual report. (Risk ID was numeric sequence # or short title suitable for cross-referencing.) |
Provided a completed Risk Register (columns 1 and 2 of table) for 5 or more cyberspace or cybersecurity related risks as identified in the company’s annual report. (Risk ID was numeric sequence # or short title suitable for cross-referencing.) |
Provided a completed Risk Register (columns 1 and 2 of table) for at least three cyberspace or cybersecurity related risks which the company faces. |
Attempted to complete the Risk Register (columns 1 and 2 of table) for 3 or more entries but information about the risks was lacking details and/or the risk register contained an in appropriate or excessive amount of “copied” information. |
Did not complete 3 or more entries in the Risk Register. |
|
Provided a complete, concise, and thorough Risk Mitigation Approach with Recommendation Security Controls by family (column 3 of table) for 10 or more cyberspace or cybersecurity related risks as identified in the company’s annual report. |
Provided a complete, concise, and thoroughRisk Mitigation Approach with Recommendation Security Controls by family (column 3 of table) for 8 or more cyberspace or cybersecurity related risks as identified in the company’s annual report. |
Provided a completed Risk Mitigation Approach with Recommendation Security Controls by family (column 3 of table) for 5 or more cyberspace or cybersecurity related risks as identified in the company’s annual report. |
Provided a completed Risk Mitigation Approach with Recommendation Security Controls by family (column 3 of table) for at least three cyberspace or cybersecurity related risks which the company faces. |
Attempted to complete the Risk Mitigation Approach with Recommendation Security Controls by family (column 3 of table) for 3 or more entries but information about risk mitigation was lacking details and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources. |
Did not complete 3 or more entries in the Risk Mitigation Approach column of the table. |
|
Demonstrated excellence in the integration of standard cybersecurity terminology into the case study. |
Provided an outstanding integration of standard cybersecurity terminology into the case study. |
Integrated standard cybersecurity terminology into the into the case study |
Used standard cybersecurity terminology but this usage was not well integrated with the discussion. |
Misused standard cybersecurity terminology. |
Did not integrate standard cybersecurity terminology into the discussion. |
|
Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited resources. Reference list entries and in-text citations are correctly formatted using the appropriate APA style for each type of resource. |
Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited resources. One or two minor errors in APA format for in-text citations and/or reference list entries. |
Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited resources. No more than 3 minor errors in APA format for in-text citations and/or reference list entries. |
Work has no more than three paragraphs with omissions of citations crediting sources for facts and information. Work contains a reference list containing entries for cited resources. Work contains no more than 5 minor errors in APA format for in-text citations and/or reference list entries. |
Work attempts to credit sources but demonstrates a fundamental failure to understand and apply the APA formatting standard as defined in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). |
Reference list is missing. Work demonstrates an overall failure to incorporate and/or credit authoritative sources for information used in the paper. |
|
Submitted work shows outstanding organization and the use of color, fonts, titles, headings and sub-headings, etc. is appropriate to the assignment type. |
Submitted work has minor style or formatting flaws but still presents a professional appearance. Submitted work is well organized and appropriately uses color, fonts, and section headings (per the assignment’s directions). |
Organization and/or appearance of submitted work could be improved through better use of fonts, color, titles, headings, etc. OR Submitted work has multiple style or formatting errors. Professional appearance could be improved. |
Submitted work has multiple style or formatting errors. Organization and professional appearance need substantial improvement. |
Submitted work meets minimum requirements but has major style and formatting errors. Work is disorganized and needs to be rewritten for readability and professional appearance. |
Submitted work is poorly organized and formatted. Writing and presentation are lacking in professional style and appearance. Work does not reflect college level writing skills. |
|
No formatting, grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors. |
Work contains minor errors in formatting, grammar, spelling or punctuation which do not significantly impact professional appearance. |
Errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, or punctuation which detract from professional appearance of the submitted work. |
Submitted work has numerous errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, or punctuation. Work is unprofessional in appearance. |
Submitted work is difficult to read / understand and has significant errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, punctuation, or word usage. |
Submitted work is poorly executed OR does not reflect college level work. |
|
Overall Score |